JUDGMENT AND ORDER : Ajit Singh, J. This appeal is by the husband against the judgment dated 04.10.2012, whereby his petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short ‘Act’) has been dismissed. 2. Facts in short are these. Appellant–Prema Boruah and Respondent–Deepa Boruah @ Tulu were married on 17.03.1984, where after; Deepa Boruah gave birth to a female child in the year 1986. The petition for dissolution of marriage was presented on 10.05.2010. The allegation of Prema Boruah in the petition is that Deepa Boruah had deserted him without any cause and started to live in her parental home since 1986. According to Prema Boruah, Deepa Boruah is a woman of bad temperament and used to treat him with cruelty. He also alleged that she even did not inform him about birth of their second daughter. Deepa Boruah denied the allegations and stated that she is a victim of cruelty by Prema Boruah and it is he, who has deserted her. She alleged that Prema Boruah kept her in her parent’s house at Silkachubham village in 1986 at her advance stage of pregnancy to live together with one Smti Amila Barua as his wife at Sadharan Khatkhati village at Moran. Prema Boruah kept her at his parent’s house at Sadharan Khatkhati village when he was transferred to Moran from Duliajan on the pretext of having been not allotted any residential quarter and at that time he developed illicit relationship with Smti Amila Barua. When Deepa Boruah objected to this, Prema Boruah took her to her parent’s place and left her there at her advance stage of pregnancy. She also alleged that Prema Borua did not even come to see their new born second daughter and when her brother-Thaneswar Saikia-approached him to bring Deepa Boruah home, he found Prema Boruah living with said Smti Amila Barua in his village as husband and wife. It was also pleaded that Prema Boruah even did not maintain Deepa Boruah and their two (2) daughters and as such Deepa Boruah had to knock the door of the court seeking maintenance from Prema Boruah. 3. The trial court disbelieved the case of Prema Boruah and dismissed his petition for divorce. According to the trial court, Prema Boruah has grossly failed to prove the ground of desertion by Deepa Boruah. 4. 3. The trial court disbelieved the case of Prema Boruah and dismissed his petition for divorce. According to the trial court, Prema Boruah has grossly failed to prove the ground of desertion by Deepa Boruah. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we have reached the conclusion that the appeal must be dismissed. Prema Boruah has testified that Deepa Boruah withdrew from his company without any reason and went to her parental house and never came back to him. Besides, On the other hand, Deepa Boruah says that after delivery of their first daughter, they were living happily at Duliajan and she got pregnant again within one year. When Prema Boruah got transferred to Moran from Duliajan, he kept her in his parent’s house where he developed illicit relationship with one Smti Amila Barua. When Deepa Boruah objected to this, Prema Boruah took her to her parental house and left her there. Her brother-Thaneswar Saikia (DW-2)-also deposed that when he went to meet Prema Boruah-to ask him to bring Deepa Boruah and the new-born to his house, Thaneswar Saikia found Prema Boruah living with Smti Amila Barua as husband and wife. There is nothing on record to show that Deepa Boruah withdrew herself from the company of her husband without any reason. Besides, it is the evidence that Prema Boruah had also not bothered to maintain Deepa Boruah and the newly born compelling Deepa Boruah to seek judicial remedy. This also goes to show that it is Prema Boruah, who neglected Deepa Boruah and deserted her and their two daughters. 5. On the other hand, there is sufficient material to show that Prema Boruah had knowledge about birth of his second daughter and he did not go to bring Deepa Boruah to his house and that Prema Boruah had been found to be living with Smti Amila Barua as husband and wife in his village. The trial court therefore did not commit any illegality in holding that in fact, Prema Boruah had deserted Deepa Boruah and not that Deepa Boruah had deserted Prema Boruah. 6. Further, the allegation of Prema Boruah that Deepa Boruah is a woman of bad temperament and used to treat him with cruelty is also not supported by cogent evidence and there is hardly any material on record to prove that allegation. 6. Further, the allegation of Prema Boruah that Deepa Boruah is a woman of bad temperament and used to treat him with cruelty is also not supported by cogent evidence and there is hardly any material on record to prove that allegation. Neither a single incident of cruelty meted out to Prema Boruah by Deepa Boruah has been pleaded nor proved. As such the allegations leveled by him against Deepa Boruah are nothing but bald statements. 7. For these reasons, we find no merit in the appeal. It is accordingly dismissed.